Awkward timing -- or a potentially restraining influence on the behavior of Egyptian security forces?

Asked about anti-government protests sweeping Egypt, and recent unrest leading to government change in Tunisia and Lebanon, Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell told journalists Wednesday that senior Egyptian military leaders are currently in town for annual bilateral meetings with their Pentagon counterparts.

"We actually this week are hosting senior Egyptian military leaders at the Pentagon for our annual bilateral defense talks, referred to at the Military Cooperation Committee, which is chaired jointly by Assistant Secretary of Defense Sandy Vershbow and Lieutenant General Sami Anan, the chief of staff of the Egyptian armed forces," Morrell told journalists Wednesday.

"So that's just an example of how engaged we are with the Egyptians, even as these developments have taken place on the streets in Cairo and elsewhere, which I think State and the White House have spoken to in terms of our concerns about how they proceed in terms of non-violence and how they are reacted to by the government and so forth," Morrell continued.

NPR reported from Cairo Thursday that while the Egyptian police are out in force trying to block protests, the Egyptian military has as yet not made an appearance.

Here's the full exchange from the transcript:

Q: So we have seen lately major changes in Tunisia, Lebanon, and what we are seeing now in Egypt, massive protests. Is Secretary Gates concerned about these changes? And could these changes affect the U.S. relationship with its partners in the region vis-à-vis, for example, the military aid?

MR. MORRELL: Well, let me -- that's a lot, and I think these are three separate fast-moving situations that the secretary and others here in this department and, frankly, obviously throughout the government are monitoring closely as they evolve.

So I think if your question deals with where do we go from here in light of developments in Lebanon and Egypt vis-à-visour military assistance, I would probably urge you to, first and foremost, talk to State, because aid and assistance is run out of there. But we're looking at this closely. I mean, in the case of Lebanon, we're monitoring the situation as the constitutional process plays out. We will need to see what the final makeup of the Lebanese government looks like before we make any decisions regarding our relationship, including military assistance. Now, a Hezbollah-controlled government would obviously have an effect on our bilateral relationship with Lebanon. But I think State should take it from here, in terms of the ultimate impact that may or may not have on our military-to-military relationship and financial assistance.

With regards to Egypt, just as point of fact, I mean, these protests that have -- that have sprung up in the last couple of days, I think the White House has spoken to at length -- the president last night, Robert Gibbs today. There's a transcript out that you should take a look at. But we actually this week are hosting senior Egyptian military leaders at the Pentagon for our annual bilateral defense talks, referred to at the Military Cooperation Committee, which is chaired jointly by Assistant Secretary of Defense Sandy Vershbow and Lieutenant General Sami Anan, the chief of staff of the Egyptian armed forces. So that's just an example of how engaged we are with the Egyptians, even as these developments have taken place on the streets in Cairo and elsewhere, which I think State and the White House have spoken to in terms of our concerns about how they proceed in terms of non-violence and how they are reacted to by the government and so forth.

Is he cautious or ruthless? POTUS Obama is both. He will leave the Mubarek regime hanging. He left the Hariri government hanging. He left the Abbas government hanging. You can't buy off everyone, Mr. President. But better to be cautious than to be launching into military action or making promises we can't keep.

Once Egypt falls, US will pack up too. There are only 3 persons who supports USA in middle east is Mubabrak. Abdullah in jordan and saudi king of saudi Arabia. Three people in a population of 150 million. 3 out of 150, 000000.

There are only 3 persons who supports USA in middle east is Mubabrak. Abdullah in jordan and saudi king of saudi Arabia. Three people in a population of 150 million. 3 out of 150, 000000. -Posted By: joe fratto—LOU REPLY: So many jokers on this board. And just where is there “representative democracy” in the Middle-East, and North Africa? Your tack is so obvious, no mention of the father-son leadership of police state Syria. Nothing about the strangle hold of the Mullahs of Iran. Cat got your tongue concerning the Sudan, and Somalia, the sectarian violence in Iraq, the conflicts in Chechnya, and Dagestan. How about the bizarre alliance of supposedly observant Islamic states, with the openly atheistic Russians, and Chinese? And just how many brother Muslims have the geeks of al Qaeda tortured, murdered, and blown up to pieces in the last decade? Yo Joey, me thinks that you should stop chewing on the KHAT, look yourself in the mirror, and wonder what when wrong…And never forget that we have never built a wall to keep our people from leaving, just because your parents decided to live here, you and your friends don’t have to, maybe it’s time for you to have the guts to move back to “Dar al Islam”.

What a brilliant revolution, no real leadership, no declaration of grievances, nothing but a hotpot group of rioters boiling over, randomly destroying things, so typical of Middle-Eastern politics. Not to worry the “Muslim Brotherhood” will solve all your problems, just like the Red Guard of China, and Khmer Rouge of Cambodia did back in the day. But all is not lost it does make for exciting television… And your one line reply is so
insightful !

You are afraid that once Mubarak falls Israeli centric US middle east policy will collapse.
Look at the brighter side, it will pressure israel to solve Palestine problem. I am not sure whether you are for oppression or freedom. what I am hearing so far from you is anti Muslim rhetoric. I know your buddy Mubarak the gate keeper of US oppressive middle east policy is not going to be there long.

I'm one of the few that continues to believe that foreign policy should be detached from partisan politics. National interest is national interest. I hope America supports the protesters. It will help America regain some credibility, seize the opportunity for democracy in the Middle East and set a strong precedent. There are dangers, of course,namely from the Muslim Brotherhood, but in all honesty you have to take risks and I'd rather America side with a democratic movement and start building a new chapter as a positive force in the Middle East. As for the Israel-Palestine peace process, I realize that Egypt has been crucial, but the peace process is dead. I'd rather embrace democracy now than cling to a failing autocratic government in the hopes that they can help us schedule a few more pointless negotiation meetings.

Due to Israel Lobby control of or government, we support democracy only as long as it's favorable to Israel (and Israel’s obscene occupations). Look what happened when Hamas won fair and square. We funded Fatah so as to foment civil war. Similarly we don't want Hezbollah to succeed politically in Lebanon. One reason al Qaeda targets us is because we support corrupt dictators, and of course we only support those who are pro-Israel.